Cargando…
Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials
BACKGROUND: Despite the promising benefits of adaptive designs (ADs), their routine use, especially in confirmatory trials, is lagging behind the prominence given to them in the statistical literature. Much of the previous research to understand barriers and potential facilitators to the use of ADs...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4587783/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26416387 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0958-9 |
_version_ | 1782392512944537600 |
---|---|
author | Dimairo, Munyaradzi Boote, Jonathan Julious, Steven A. Nicholl, Jonathan P. Todd, Susan |
author_facet | Dimairo, Munyaradzi Boote, Jonathan Julious, Steven A. Nicholl, Jonathan P. Todd, Susan |
author_sort | Dimairo, Munyaradzi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Despite the promising benefits of adaptive designs (ADs), their routine use, especially in confirmatory trials, is lagging behind the prominence given to them in the statistical literature. Much of the previous research to understand barriers and potential facilitators to the use of ADs has been driven from a pharmaceutical drug development perspective, with little focus on trials in the public sector. In this paper, we explore key stakeholders’ experiences, perceptions and views on barriers and facilitators to the use of ADs in publicly funded confirmatory trials. METHODS: Semi-structured, in-depth interviews of key stakeholders in clinical trials research (CTU directors, funding board and panel members, statisticians, regulators, chief investigators, data monitoring committee members and health economists) were conducted through telephone or face-to-face sessions, predominantly in the UK. We purposively selected participants sequentially to optimise maximum variation in views and experiences. We employed the framework approach to analyse the qualitative data. RESULTS: We interviewed 27 participants. We found some of the perceived barriers to be: lack of knowledge and experience coupled with paucity of case studies, lack of applied training, degree of reluctance to use ADs, lack of bridge funding and time to support design work, lack of statistical expertise, some anxiety about the impact of early trial stopping on researchers’ employment contracts, lack of understanding of acceptable scope of ADs and when ADs are appropriate, and statistical and practical complexities. Reluctance to use ADs seemed to be influenced by: therapeutic area, unfamiliarity, concerns about their robustness in decision-making and acceptability of findings to change practice, perceived complexities and proposed type of AD, among others. CONCLUSIONS: There are still considerable multifaceted, individual and organisational obstacles to be addressed to improve uptake, and successful implementation of ADs when appropriate. Nevertheless, inferred positive change in attitudes and receptiveness towards the appropriate use of ADs by public funders are supportive and are a stepping stone for the future utilisation of ADs by researchers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0958-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4587783 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45877832015-09-30 Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials Dimairo, Munyaradzi Boote, Jonathan Julious, Steven A. Nicholl, Jonathan P. Todd, Susan Trials Research BACKGROUND: Despite the promising benefits of adaptive designs (ADs), their routine use, especially in confirmatory trials, is lagging behind the prominence given to them in the statistical literature. Much of the previous research to understand barriers and potential facilitators to the use of ADs has been driven from a pharmaceutical drug development perspective, with little focus on trials in the public sector. In this paper, we explore key stakeholders’ experiences, perceptions and views on barriers and facilitators to the use of ADs in publicly funded confirmatory trials. METHODS: Semi-structured, in-depth interviews of key stakeholders in clinical trials research (CTU directors, funding board and panel members, statisticians, regulators, chief investigators, data monitoring committee members and health economists) were conducted through telephone or face-to-face sessions, predominantly in the UK. We purposively selected participants sequentially to optimise maximum variation in views and experiences. We employed the framework approach to analyse the qualitative data. RESULTS: We interviewed 27 participants. We found some of the perceived barriers to be: lack of knowledge and experience coupled with paucity of case studies, lack of applied training, degree of reluctance to use ADs, lack of bridge funding and time to support design work, lack of statistical expertise, some anxiety about the impact of early trial stopping on researchers’ employment contracts, lack of understanding of acceptable scope of ADs and when ADs are appropriate, and statistical and practical complexities. Reluctance to use ADs seemed to be influenced by: therapeutic area, unfamiliarity, concerns about their robustness in decision-making and acceptability of findings to change practice, perceived complexities and proposed type of AD, among others. CONCLUSIONS: There are still considerable multifaceted, individual and organisational obstacles to be addressed to improve uptake, and successful implementation of ADs when appropriate. Nevertheless, inferred positive change in attitudes and receptiveness towards the appropriate use of ADs by public funders are supportive and are a stepping stone for the future utilisation of ADs by researchers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0958-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4587783/ /pubmed/26416387 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0958-9 Text en © Dimairo et al. 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Dimairo, Munyaradzi Boote, Jonathan Julious, Steven A. Nicholl, Jonathan P. Todd, Susan Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials |
title | Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials |
title_full | Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials |
title_fullStr | Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials |
title_short | Missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials |
title_sort | missing steps in a staircase: a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4587783/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26416387 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0958-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dimairomunyaradzi missingstepsinastaircaseaqualitativestudyoftheperspectivesofkeystakeholdersontheuseofadaptivedesignsinconfirmatorytrials AT bootejonathan missingstepsinastaircaseaqualitativestudyoftheperspectivesofkeystakeholdersontheuseofadaptivedesignsinconfirmatorytrials AT juliousstevena missingstepsinastaircaseaqualitativestudyoftheperspectivesofkeystakeholdersontheuseofadaptivedesignsinconfirmatorytrials AT nicholljonathanp missingstepsinastaircaseaqualitativestudyoftheperspectivesofkeystakeholdersontheuseofadaptivedesignsinconfirmatorytrials AT toddsusan missingstepsinastaircaseaqualitativestudyoftheperspectivesofkeystakeholdersontheuseofadaptivedesignsinconfirmatorytrials |